The Difference between Psychological and Social Affairs and the Implications for key players
MetadataShow full item record
The costs associated with organisational and institutional disputes and scandals are significant, as evidenced in the Chico University hazing case 2005, which resulted in the death of Matthew Carrington. Because this affair became public, it was possible to conduct an analysis of materials. However, since the 1960s, specific workplace measures to keep issues within the organisation, including humanisation and psychologisation of the workplace, have resulted in the containment of issues as private affairs, making them difficult to investigate. Cases that breach containment and enter the public domain offer an opportunity to explore, not only escalations of conflict, but also the private, contained phase of events. Using Boltanski's affair model to explore the phases of the Chico affair, specific differences between psychological and social affairs are examined. This case highlights key phases that a conflict or scandal may pass through from psychological to social affair. Key phases of the process are outlined and discussed in light of the containment of the issues and implications for main players, including the organisation or institution. This study contributes to an understanding of conflict processes and outcomes.
Mustang Journal of Business and Ethics
© 2013 Mustang Journals. The attached file is reproduced here in accordance with the copyright policy of the publisher. Please refer to the journal's website for access to the definitive, published version.
Sociological Methodology and Research Methods